In this section
@article{Wilke:2019:10.1186/s12984-019-0622-9,
author = {Wilke, MA and Niethammer, C and Meyer, B and Farina, D and Dosen, S},
doi = {10.1186/s12984-019-0622-9},
journal = {J Neuroeng Rehabil},
title = {Psychometric characterization of incidental feedback sources during grasping with a hand prosthesis.},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12984-019-0622-9},
volume = {16},
year = {2019}
}
TY - JOUR
AB - BACKGROUND: A prosthetic system should ideally reinstate the bidirectional communication between the user's brain and its end effector by restoring both motor and sensory functions lost after an amputation. However, current commercial prostheses generally do not incorporate somatosensory feedback. Even without explicit feedback, grasping using a prosthesis partly relies on sensory information. Indeed, the prosthesis operation is characterized by visual and sound cues that could be exploited by the user to estimate the prosthesis state. However, the quality of this incidental feedback has not been objectively evaluated. METHODS: In this study, the psychometric properties of the auditory and visual feedback of prosthesis motion were assessed and compared to that of a vibro-tactile interface. Twelve able-bodied subjects passively observed prosthesis closing and grasping an object, and they were asked to discriminate (experiment I) or estimate (experiment II) the closing velocity of the prosthesis using visual (VIS), acoustic (SND), or combined (VIS + SND) feedback. In experiment II, the subjects performed the task also with a vibrotactile stimulus (VIB) delivered using a single tactor. The outcome measures for the discrimination and estimation experiments were just noticeable difference (JND) and median absolute estimation error (MAE), respectively. RESULTS: The results demonstrated that the incidental sources provided a remarkably good discrimination and estimation of the closing velocity, significantly outperforming the vibrotactile feedback. Using incidental sources, the subjects could discriminate almost the minimum possible increment/decrement in velocity that could be commanded to the prosthesis (median JND < 2% for SND and VIS + SND). Similarly, the median MAE in estimating the prosthesis velocity randomly commanded from the full working range was also low, i.e., approximately 5% in SND and VIS + SND. CO
AU - Wilke,MA
AU - Niethammer,C
AU - Meyer,B
AU - Farina,D
AU - Dosen,S
DO - 10.1186/s12984-019-0622-9
PY - 2019///
TI - Psychometric characterization of incidental feedback sources during grasping with a hand prosthesis.
T2 - J Neuroeng Rehabil
UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12984-019-0622-9
UR - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31823792
VL - 16
ER -